2. Identify and summarize at least three key issues in the upcoming elections. Discuss the positions of any two politicians still in the running for Presidental nomination in the Democratic and Republican parties. What are the major differences in their political views? Who's politics do you support more? Why?
3. Then, read a recent New York Times editorial about the similarties between Senator Hillary Clinton and one of the Presidents covered in out latest unit, Grover Cleveland:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener/nyts-krugman-hillary-_b_70643.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener/nyts-krugman-hillary-_b_70643.html
And an article from US News and World Reports about a scandal that took place in the 1888 election:
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/politics/2008/01/17/phony-letter-helped-unseat-a-president.html
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/politics/2008/01/17/phony-letter-helped-unseat-a-president.html
Summarize the scandal of 1888 and explain why the author feels Hilliary Clinton might be "the next Grover Cleveland?" Evaluate his position using evidence from your candidate research.
For optional extra credit you may complete one or both of the following tasks:
a) Research two third party candidates and summarize and compare their views with the other candidates you read about for this blog
a) Research two third party candidates and summarize and compare their views with the other candidates you read about for this blog
AND/OR
b)Identify summarize two "Great Moments in Campaign History" from US News' recent coverstory: http://www.usnews.com/features/news/politics/greatmoments.html
THIS BLOG MUST BE AT LEAST 400 words. Please remember to comment on at least one other post. Extra credits should be 200 words each. Due Monday 2/25 before class.
22 comments:
Teresa Konopka
AP US
With the race to the presidential nomination, each politician on the Democratic and Republic side is struggling to be the last [wo]man standing. Mike Gravel is on the Democratic side. He wants America to be neutral in international affairs. When on CNN, he told correspondents that America makes its own enemies and should stop. He also promotes education and wants to further enhance it, making it more efficient and more affordable. Gravel even suggests ridding of all defensive bombs the nation holds. He stated that blowing up other nations as a defense mechanism is useless and just leads to more violence. Gravel rhetoric makes sense, and he seems like a congenial candidate. Despondently, as many CNN correspondents point out, when most people hear the name Gravel, they think of dirt before remembering the shadow trudging behind Obama and Clinton in the race for the Democratic nomination.
Ron Paul is on the Republican side. He feels that 9/11 was America’s fault--claiming that America bombed terrorists for ten years before. He also states that citizens should question standard government policy and speak out against flaws in the system. Lastly, Ron Paul is conservative in his views when it comes to abortion; he is against it. Surprisingly, to gain attention and possibly votes, Paul has sent out a blimp with his name and catchy slogans on it around the American coast. Perhaps, like in 1988, Paul will lose presidency yet again. If it came down to Gravel and Paul, Gravel would most likely win. He is not full of hooey, and he seems to care for the well-being of Americans.
Apparently, according to the New York Times, Hillary Clinton is akin to Grover Cleveland. Cleveland was the Democrat in the White House, in a time when Republicans ran the show, so to speak. He proposed ending the Pullman workers strike and wanted to improve America’s gold standard. The New York Times author insinuates that Cleveland was lazy as a French heir, not fully keeping all of his promises. This somewhat anti-Cleveland / anti-Clinton article means to poke at two candidates who supposedly give Democrats a bad name.
As previewed in Dirty Campaign Tricks, candidates did anything to get into the White House, even in the nineteenth century. Fro Grover Cleveland, he left in 1888 and returned in 1892, being the first president to be elected to two nonconsecutive terms. Basically, a foe by the name of Osgoodby sent a letter to Cleveland, not at all informing him that he was really Republican. Instead, he claimed that he was a British man who wanted to know if Cleveland would favor English diplomacy. In the past, the Irish were angry when Cleveland made a fish-based treaty with Britain. Now, with the letter, most Irish abhorred Cleveland. Perhaps Clinton, like Cleveland will be the source of some scandal and leave behind a vain legacy, too (as if the Clinton and Monica scandal wasn’t enough). Only time will tell.
With third parties, the presidency is not just open to Republicans and Democrats.
Don Grudman is from California and represents the Constitutional party. He is against homosexuality, feels that all Americans are equal (regardless of skin), and believes that taxes should be dramatically lessened, if not completely done away with. Jesse Johnson from West Virginia represents the Green party. He wants to expand the film industry to create more jobs, enforce weight limits on coal trucks, and preserve women’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. Both Grudman and Johnson have, in their minds, ways to improve the State. Still, as third party nominees, they are often out of the limelight and disregarded.
History was marked by many moments in campaigning history. In 1988, Michael Dukakis lost the presidential election. While giddy to be atop a tank one day, a photo was taken of him. This picture of Dukakis with a dunce-like smirk was seen all over and greatly ruined his campaign. For more modern elections, students at Washington and Lee University hold mock campaigns and hypothesize who will win. Eighteen out of twenty-three times, they have been correct. Since then, many candidates have begun visiting the school and pushing their luck for Washington and Lee’s special nominal touch.
Question to AP peers:
If you had the opportunity to run as a vice president for any president (during any era), who would you choose and why?
Mike Huckabee is easily the most conservative of the Republican candidates. He was a pastor before going into politics, and is currently caught up in a scandal by supporting a preacher who has been proven to be embezzling millions of church funds. He opposes abortion and would overturn Roe v. Wade as well as staff all “relevant positions” with pro-life supporters. He opposes embryonic stem cell research as well as same-sex marriage. He has called homosexuality “an aberrant, unnatural, sinful lifestyle.” He supports making tax cuts permanent, as well as introducing a “FairTax,” which is based on wealth. He believes that parents have the right to home school their children, and that art and music are just as important as math and science with regard to education. Although he supports No Child Left Behind, he also thinks that states must be allowed to use their own standards. Even though he claims he supports pursuing alternative forms of energy, Huckabee supports drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge. Nevertheless, he promises full energy independence for he United States by the end of his second term. He supports globalization, saying that it can lead to cheaper goods and the essential “pay raise.” He is a member of the National Rifle Association is opposes any type of restriction on the second amendment. He opposes universal health care and instead encourages the private sector to deal with it. He would close Guantanamo Bay prison, but would also invest much more money in defense and expand the military. He wishes to modernize the current immigration process while discouraging dual citizenship. Huckabee believes the president has the right to use military action without congressional approval in certain circumstances.
Hilary Clinton, comparably, is the epitome of a Democrat. She has been long-hated by Republicans for both her positions and attitude. She would make Roe v. Wade into law and opposes any legislation restricting abortion rights. She would invest federal money into relief funds for those facing foreclosures or high heating bills. She would end No Child Left Behind and create universal Pre-K. She would double federal investment in alternative energy resources as well as make the national standard for cars 55 MPG by 2030, along with developing a new treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol and opposes drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge. She would also end existing tax breaks for outsourcing jobs. She supports strong regulation on guns and gun control. Clinton has proposed a plan for universal healthcare. She believes the best way to combat anti-Americanism is to "…renew those alliances around the world, around a common set of goals including combating genocide, expanding human rights, promoting reconciliation through diplomacy, stopping nuclear proliferation, and addressing global warming." She supports increasing border security and enforcing existing immigration laws. She supports pulling troops out of Iraq, and regrets her decision to vote for the war previously. She opposes same-sex marriage, but supports civil unions and opposes a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages. She also supports expanding federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
The major differences between these two candidates lie mainly along party lines. Sadly, politics in America today are sharply partisan and there seems to be very little compromise. The entire country seems to be divided in half. Huckabee is the stereotypical Republican, and Clinton the stereotypical Democrat. Their positions only appeal to those within their own parties; there is nothing special or unique that would appeal to those on the “other side.”
Though I typically am more of a moderate and would rather not flatly support either candidate, if I had to choose between Clinton and Huckabee, my vote would be for Clinton. I strongly support separation of church and state; it’s my biggest issue next to the environment. Therefore, besides Huckabee’s hypocritical environmental views and Clinton’s more concrete environmental plan, I also support Clinton instead of Huckabee because of his history and position with regard to religion. I do not feel that, as a president, Huckabee would keep religion of the public spaces and politics. Under his lead, I fear that my tax dollars could be going to support a faith-based organization with a mission that I do not agree. I also fear that my first amendment right to freedom of religion, while probably not endangered, could be under serious threat with Huckabee as president.
The scandal of 1888 quite literally decided the fate of a nation. The presidential race of that year was between Democrat Grover Cleveland, who was running for re-election, and Republican Benjamin Harrison. The race was a close one, and ultimately the decision lay with New York, who had thirty-six electoral votes. Although Cleveland had once been a mayor and governor there, there was also a very large Irish population in New York, and Cleveland had very recently offended them by negotiating a treaty with the hated British. A Republican named George Osgoodby then sent a letter to the British government, unbeknownst to Cleveland, asking them who they endorsed. When the replied favoring Cleveland, the Republicans publicized the letter, acting as though Cleveland always had close ties with the British. Consequently, Cleveland lost New York, and the presidency.
It is not, however, for this reason that a New York Times editorial compares Hilary Clinton to Grover Cleveland. Cleveland was the only Democrat to be elected between 1860 and 1912, and therefore had political ideas very similar to the Republicans. The editor fears that Hilary, like Cleveland, may compromise with the “other side” too much, particularly concerning health care. In her effort to gain support, the editor hypothesizes that Clinton may be doing too much bargaining with private insurance and pharmaceutical companies instead of following party ideals and concentrating on a federal approach to the subject.
In response to Teresa: If I could run as a vice-president to any president in any era, I would probably choose George Washington. That was when the country was just beginning to form and many decisions that would decide the fate of the nation were being made. I would have liked to have helped make those decisions and put my two cents in!
Elizabeth Che
AP US History Block B
Part 1 - 2
As with any other elections, issues are importantly used to decide if a candidate resonates the same beliefs as the voter. Three issues that were discussed in the candidate election were energy, environment, and housing The issue of energy and environment coincides as energy deals with the belief that the United States is depending on far too many other countries for energy resources and environment is towards the controversial issue of global warming. Where as housing deals with the nation on a local level, aimed at the bankrupt or bought out sub prime loans who caused mortgage bills to increase to the point where people are unable to pay.
John McCain of the Republicans is stated by CNN to support the reliance on American industries and science. Along this line, McCain plans to create safe storage of used nuclear fuel while giving the hosting states / areas a “proprietary interest.” His plan focuses around the market as he planed to “set reasonable caps on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions, and provide industries with tradable credits.” When asked about the environment, McCain responds with a similar method, using trading markets and advanced technology to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases. The Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2007 also backs up his plan of using an alternative energy source such as nuclear energy. As for housing, McCain gives no creative measures as he proposed “greater intervention by the federal government to limit effects of mortgage crisis if current measures fail.” However, the government should not bailout the individual unless as a last resort.
On the other hand, Hillary Clinton, representing the Democrats proposes an intricate plan on multiple levels to decrease the amount of energy reliance over future years. Investments in energy will be made through a $50 billion fund “paid for in part by oil companies.” As CNN explains, basic energy research will be doubled resulting renewable energy to generate 25% of electricity by 2025 and increase fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2030. However, in order for such precesses to be effective, a “National Energy Council” is to be formed within the White House to ensure action by the Executive Branch. Similarly, Clinton proposes to deal with the environmental issues through an international effort. A new treaty is to replace the Kyoto Protocol to prevent the increase of global deforestation. Meanwhile within the United States, “solar, wind, biofuels, hydropower, geothermal and other sources of renewable energy” will be used to help energy independence. As for housing, monthly rates on subprime adjustable rate mortgages are to be frozen for at least five years until mortgages are affordable with fixed-rate loans.
Between John McCain and Hillary Clinton, I support Hillary Clinton more as her methods seem well thought and thorough compared to the brief statements regarding McCain’s technological dependence. McCain focuses on solving issues through the market and technology whereas Clinton resolves issues through estimated years and varieties of options. Instead of limiting herself to one set standard, there are other aspects to her proposal to back her if another is faulty.
Part 3
The scandal of 1888 revolved around the Democrat Grover Cleveland and the Republican Benjamin Harrison. In the close battle between the two candidates, the Republicans took advantage of the Irish minority to cause Cleveland to loose the electoral votes of New York. Through the folly of the British ambassador to the United States, Cleveland was named to best “favor England’s interests” causing the Irish who despised the British to turn their backs against Cleveland. Although Harrison lost by 100,000 popular votes, Harrison had 233 electoral votes as opposed to Cleveland’s 168. Hence, the Republicans victory. The manipulation of personal interest had a large scale effect towards the presidential election of 1888. Despite Cleveland’s loss, he was elected once again as president in 1892. As the article, “Dirty Campaign Trick: The Phony Charles Murchison Letter Upended Grover Cleveland’s 1888 Presidential Bid” by Matthew Bandyk, describes Cleveland became “the nation’s only president elected to two nonconsecutive terms.”
“NTY’s Krugman: Hillary – the Next Grover Cleveland?” describes Hillary Clinton to be similar to Grover Cleveland through their actions. Cleveland was noted by Bandyk to have a “reputation for doing what he thought was right despite the political consequences.” As for Hillary Clinton, Krugman claims that Clinton may bring destruction upon the healthcare plan Democrats have made. Previously noted by Kasey, Krugman then notes how negotiations with insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital companies will lead astray the set path which is sought. Her previous actions as the First Lady in 1993 was mentioned hinting at an “organized group that will make it clear that this is not what you’re suppose to do.” Like Cleveland who did as he pleased, Krugman hints at the possibility that Clinton may also break away from politics to socialize with the businesses.
In response to Teresa’s question:
If I were to be presented with such an opportunity, I would not be able to choose between any of the presidents as I have little interest within the political field. The lack of motivation would cause un-beneficial results to all as I would need to be reeducated before setting out to work as a vice-president to anyone.
Extra Credit:
Katherine Swift is a Green Party nominee for president. She is against capital punishment and for the legalization of marijuana, as well as in support of flag burning, gun control, gay rights and abortion.. She is against the Electoral College, taxes, free trade and welfare. Daniel Imperato is a Libertarian nominee. His major issues include the development of an online national education system, expansion of labor unions into Latin America, and making a federal charity the only charity that can be donated to unlimitedly with tax rebates.
The impression that I received from both candidates was that both sort of… didn’t know what they were doing, I suppose. Swift’s website was very unprofessional, and Imperato didn’t really lay out a firm plan like the other candidates do. Although both the third party candidates and Democratic and Republican nominees focus on similar issues, they tend to have very differing ideas on how to fix those issues. In my opinion, the ideas the third party candidates laid out didn’t seem very realistic and even seemed laughable in some cases, such as Imperato’s plan to fix Social Security and his online national education system. Swift also has very little governmental experience, (even less than Obama!) and that would make me as a voter feel very insecure about her competence in such a high level federal position.
Thomas Jefferson, commonly known as Kasey’s Mom’s History Boyfriend, was constantly under attack during the 1804 elections. Though he won it by a landslide, he faced numerous criticisms for his deistic views and lack of distinction and hierarchy between classes. One of the most ardent criticizers of Jefferson was the author of ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas, Clement Moore, a very religious man, anonymously attacked Jefferson, saying his view on history and creation made him an infidel. But by not responding to these attacks, Jefferson rose above the opposition and won the election with 92% of the vote.
The first presidential debate that took place on TV also marked a time of national importance in campaign history. The difference between Kennedy and Nixon during the debate was noticed most markedly by those who watched the debate on television. Nixon didn’t prepare for the debate, and looked positively old and haggard compared to the younger, more energetic and prepared Kennedy. Those who watched the debate believed that Kennedy won, thanks to his more handsome appearance, while those who listened on the radio believed that the more familiar voice of Nixon won. In the end, it was Kennedy who stole the show, using the new technology of television to his every advantage in the campaign.
Part One
Three Key Issues in the Upcoming Elections:
- Abortion: Whether Pro-Life or Pro-Choice, this delicate issue regarding the death of an unborn baby is constantly debated. While one side believes they should have the right to choose whether or not to kill their baby, another side believes killing a baby is a direct crime of murder. In this case, Hillary Clinton is an example of pro-choice and Mike Huckabee is an example of pro-life.
- Immigration: The battle over how to deal with illegal immigration continues. Most individuals support the idea of a border fence along the U.S- Mexican border, while others believe such an idea will do nothing to deter illegal immigrants from crossing. Mike Huckabee portrays a more strict and precise policy (Nine Point Strategy) regarding immigration, while Hillary Clinton simply desires an improved border security technology.
- Same- Sex Marriage: The definition of marriage is the union between a man and a woman, yet in today's society several individuals wish to change this. While Huckabee straight out opposes same-sex marriage, Clinton believes states should ultimately decide the issue.
Evidently, Huckabee and Clinton portray two unique ways on how to handle these three issues America is facing in today's society. While Huckabee is pro-life, Clinton stands pro-choice. Clinton is willing to levy the decision of same sex marriage to the states, where as Huckabee stands non-negotiable as he is totally against same sex marriage. Last but certainly not least, Huckabee provides a strict and precise "Nine Point Plan" regarding immigration distinct from Clinton's vague desire for a 700 mile fence along the U.S-Mexican border. Based on just these three issues concerning the majority of Americans today, Mike Huckabee seems like the right choice for an active and alert President. His precise plans and straight-forward policies seem real and true, not impressive and fake. Instead of giving the people what they want to hear, Mike Huckabee seems to stand true to his beliefs which are similar to mine.
Part Two
The scandal of 1888 began with what seemed to be a harmless letter sent to the British ambassador of the United States. George Osgoodby, a Republican in California, made believe he was the British expatriate, Charles Murchison, and questioned the ambassador on which candidate would best "favor England's interests". With no sense of wrong doing, the ambassador endorsed Grover Cleveland. The Republican party took this answer to their advantage and publicized the letter around the country as evidence that Cleveland was pro-British. As a result, many Irish individuals were offended by Cleveland's 'pro-British' reputation from the letter, and thus affected Cleveland's electoral votes tremendously.
Although Cleveland still won the elections, the scandal of 1888 overall affected Cleveland's reputation and true beliefs. The author of "NYT's Krugman: Hillary-- the Next Grover Cleveland?" believes Hillary is drifting away from her primary focus of democratic beliefs only. With health care as a large issue facing America today, the author sees Hillary spending too much time and money dedicated to compromising and negotiating with the insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital companies. . "Earlier that day, the New York Times reported on page one that the health care industry has already contributed $2.7 million to Hillary, more than any other candidate in either party." Like Cleveland, Hillary has a high chance of going into office and forgetting all that was said and promised during her campaigns. These two political figures were suppose to represent and live the democratic life, not the republican. Thus, the author compares Clinton to Cleveland in fear that Clinton may follow Cleveland's footsteps on crossing the lines from a dedicated democrat to a partial republican.
During the 2008 Presidential Elections it has been evident that the people of the United States are looking towards the Democratic side for change rather then the Republican side after what Bush and his Republican campaign have done over the last eight years. Youtube is evidence of the people leaning towards the Democratic side because there are no 'most viewed' Republican debate videos while Democratic debate videos receive clicks by the ten thousands.
While all candidates express their opinions on the usual hot topics like abortion, the war and immigration, Ron Paul, a Republican candidate, has taken his debating to another level. His lowly numbers show that the majority isn't interested in him, however, I support his policies. He is the only candidate from either side to mention the future of economics of the United States and while others have touched on Reagan and Clinton's ways in the past, he is also the only one to criticize the Bush administration. Ron Paul will not win the Republican debate because one, he is too far back according to the numbers, and two, he tells the people the truth and how things really are, unlike his opponents who boast about what they say they will do to receive a higher vote.
"Is America ready for a black President" was the question from the beginning for Obama. Apparently so, as the former Muslim has a chance to clinch the Democratic nomination. Obama can't make up his mind on some issues like immigration for example. He clearly stated that he is pro immigration but anti illegal immigration as he voted for a fence in Mexico but also stated that he wanted to provided a legal path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants; if that makes any sense. Obama and Clinton agree on numerous topics but both still come to blows during debates as they mostly argue on topics that either of them have changed their mind about in the past decade. Although Obama has the numbers, for now, Clinton will become the forty-fourth President of the United States of America.
Jon Wiener believes that Hilary Clinton will be the next Grover Cleveland because Cleveland was stuck between Republicans and a country which was dominated by the Republicans. It seems that Hilary will be stuck between Republicans and have to constantly fight them to better her cause. Also for both Cleveland and Clinton Health Care is the topic where both have exceeded and won nominations. But most importantly in the background of this article Cleveland was President in the midst of the Great Depression and the author is proposing that the United States might experience another depression.
Teresa:
If I could run as vice president at any time in history I would run under President Bush in the past eight years. I picked this time in history because Dick Cheney has done a horrible job as vice president. I would have advised Bush better and helped him made better decisions. A study in 2003 said that Bush and company have made over 1,000 false statements to the public. I took him two years in office to make up 1,000 lies. Imagine the number of lies that we've heard in these eight years.
Michelle Shed
AP US: Block B
Part 1
If I could characterize myself into any category, I would compare myself to a Jingoist. I take immense pride in my country. I love my country's history, literature, and economy, which is based on consumer goods and of course, a cup of Starbucks coffee. However, I am not fond of most of the politicians who wish to become the president of my country. I perfer someone like Ronald Regan. Even though he was way before my time, I believe the whole world loved him. Not only for his acting ability, but also for his leadership skills for the free world. The economy was up, terrorism was up. Life was great. At least, that's what I researched and that's what I've been told by my family members.
Even though I feel very ill writing this, Hillary Clinton has my utmost admiration running for the political office. It takes a lot of courage for a woman to run for presidency and hopefully be elected. I am all for that; being I too am a female. Although she makes me sick to my stomache, I also admire the fact that she supports a womans' right to abortion. As a woman, I would not want the federal government telling me how to run my body. On the other hand, there are certain things I dislike what Hillary stands for. She wants to de-authorize the War in Iraq. She opposed George W. Bush's plan to decrease the number of American troops being sent to Iraq. She does not support tax cuts. She opposed 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts. Hillary Clinton supports Civil Unions, but not same-sex marriage. As for social security, well, Hillary opposes Bush planning, which allows workers to divert some Social Security payroll taxes into private retirement accounts. She also supports universal health care.The three key issues Hillary focuses on are the War in Iraq, universal health care, and abortion rights. Honestly, and overall, she makes me feel very, very sick. I don't like that she wants universal health care. If Hillary was ever diagnosed for breast cancer, she would not wait six weeks or two months for an appointment like every other American individual. She would end up going to some private clinic in Mexico or Switzerland. That's what she'd do.
John McCain has my utmost admiration when it comes to his views on the War in Iraq. I admire the fact that he voted for use of military force in Iraq. He supported Bush's veto of war spending bill that would have withdrawn most U.S. troops by March 2008. He was an early proponent of sending additional American troops to Iraq. I believe that if our country started a war, then we should finish it. Also, in Iraq, our country is in the liberation stage. If our troops pull out, the government of Iraq will turn into an anarchist government. On the other hand, there are certain things I dislike about John McCain. He opposes abortion rights except in cases of rape, incest or to protect the life of the mother. I believe that no man, woman, state, or federal government has the right to decide whether a woman can or cannot have an aborition. It's a woman's choice. No one can change that. The three key issues that John McCain focuses on are the War in Iraq, foreign invasion, and taxes. Honestly and overall, I feel that he is the reincarnation of Michael Bloomberg. He may say that he's a Republican, but I know that he's a Democrat. Bloomberg said he's a Republican, and now he's a Democrat.
Part 2
Hillary Clinton and Grover Cleveland are both similar when it comes to economics. Jon Weiner feels that Hillary Clinton might be "the next Grover Cleveland" because she is running for presidency at a time when Republicans are mostly in power. Grover Cleveland was the only Democrat who made it to the White House between 1860 and 1912, the decades when Republican big money ruled the country. Grover Cleveland mobilized the army to crush the 1894 Pullman strike of railroad workers, and joined Wall Street in supporting the gold standard. Hillary wants universal health care and she raised 2.7 million dollars on her health care plan.
In Matthew Bandyk's " Dirty Campaign Trick: The Phony Charles Murchison Letter Upended Grover Cleveland's 1888 Presidental Bid," he explains that one political scandal of a letter, enabled the election of an American president. In 1888, the sitting president was Grover Cleveland. Challenging Cleveland was Republican Benjamin Harrison, the grandson of ninth president William Henry Harrison. According to Bandy, while racing for presidency, Cleveland was vulnerable in New York's sizable Irish community after his administration negotiated a fisheries treaty with the British Empire, which was hated by the Irish. "Now, George Osgoodby, a Republican in California, sent a letter to the British ambassador to the United States under the pretense that he was a British expatriate named Charles Murchison who wanted to know the candidate who would best "favor England's interests." When the ambassador endorsed Cleveland, he unknowingly stepped into the Republicans' trap; the party trumpeted his letter around the country as evidence that Cleveland had been pro-British all along."
It's amazing how dirty politics are. I enjoy listening to politics, but I could never become a politician. I'm not cut out for the job.
Teresa: I would choose to be Vice President under Bill Clinton. I would have talked some sense into him and he wouldn't have bombed Yugoslavia.
Woops I forgot to respond to a student....... :]
Teresa: I would love to be vice president under Abraham Lincoln's presidency. Just being by his side during all of his decisions and actions would be adventurous. I would have loved to be supporting the man who freed the slaves through the Civil War, history Americans will never forget.
Anam Baig, Block B, AP US History
Part II
Hillary Clinton, a Democratic candidate, is a supporter of women’s rights when it comes to abortion. She believes that “abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.” She wants to spread awareness about pregnancy and teach young adults how to make the right decisions when they fall into those situations. Her policy is to educate and inform the public. Clinton also supports stronger gun control laws. She believes that guns should not be misused. If there are stronger laws restricting the sale of guns or the way they are manufactured, fewer deaths related to the misuse of firearms would occur. Clinton believes that illegal immigrants should come out of the shadows and apply for American citizenship. They should pay all back taxes and a fine for coming into the United States illegally. Also, Clinton supports the construction of the fence on the Mexican-American border. Clinton has these views because she is a Democrat and a more liberal candidate. I would support Clinton because she is an advocate for women’s rights, supporter of stronger gun regulation, and supports a reasonable plan for illegal immigration issues. She’s been in a political arena for a long time, and she knows what being inside the White House is like, so I admire the knowledge she has.
Mike Huckabee, a Republican candidate, is a pro-life advocate who feels that Roe v. Wade should be overturned. He will veto any pro-abortion bill that comes through the Supreme Court and when he was a senator he banned partial birth abortion. Huckabee does not feel that gun control should be any stricter, being a gun owner himself. He does not feel that guns should be regulated because he strongly supports the 2nd Amendment, which is the right to bear arms. He believes that a person has the right to protect his or her family and if they need to own a weapon, they should. Huckabee is also against illegal immigration and feels that employers who hire illegal immigrants should be fined. He feels that the border fence should be built by 2010. He feels that no one should come into the United States through the “back door” and should go through the whole process of citizenship. Huckabee’s views are conservative and he also thinks with a religious ideal, in contrast to Clinton who is liberal and does not think religiously. Since Huckabee used to be a pastor, he connects the church with state often, whether it is done intentionally or not.
Part III:
Jon Wiener in his editorial compares Hillary Clinton with former president Grover Cleveland. He doesn’t compare her to Cleveland as the “Bourbon Democrat” but as a president who would compromise for the other party, rather than stick to her own party views. Her health care plan involves compromising with private pharmaceutical and hospital companies, much like what she did when she was First Lady in 1993. Like Cleveland, who was very dependent on the Republican Party during the 19th Century, Clinton might be too dependent on the Republican Party of today and would be unable to fulfill the ideals of the democratic party.
(The link of the second part of this question didn’t work for me, so I was unable to answer the question. Sorry!)
Response to Teresa: I would like to be the vice president under George Bush Jr. because I would stop the war before it began and be very adamant about the sources of information we receive from outside sources. If I were his vice president I would make sure that the United States did not interfere with other nations' business when it comes to their sovereignty. I would make sure that the government reacted only to direct threats or direct violence from other nations and would never let Bush pass any acts that would limit the rights of the people or limit the power of the judicial branch.
Marco Muniz
2/24/08
Identify and summarize at least three key issues in the upcoming elections. Discuss the positions of any two politicians still in the running for Presidential nomination in the Democratic and Republican parties. What are the major differences in their political views? Who's politics do you support more? Why?
1.
Three key issues in the upcoming elections are Iraq, healthcare and immigration.
Iraq is arguably the hugest issue in the coming presidential elections. The US is divided on whether to return troops home or keep them in Iraq. Some believe that Iraq is abusing American generosity, and therefore is not being efficient or fast in dealing with its own problems. Others feel that Iraq needs the troops to maintain order and win the fight against terrorism. Returning troops back to the US would supposedly single a win to Al queda and terrorism. The democratic nominees for the presidency support withdrawal from Iraq, while republican candidates support staying in Iraq, except for Ron Paul. Democrat Hilary Clinton supports withdrawal of American troops at a rate of 5 brigades a month and to also bring American citizens currently in Iraq back to the States. She feels these actions would be beneficial to Iraq and the U S. “The Iraqi government was given everything it needed to start making the decisions it can only make, and they haven’t done it,” Clinton states. She believes troop withdrawal would force the government to start making these tough decisions faster. On the other hand, Republican John McCain supports the Iraq War. He believes that a win on Iraqi insurgency is a win in other nations as well, as it would be a message that Terrorism will not be tolerated. McCain feels withdrawal would only raise terrorist spirits. “Al queda would the celebrate to the world they have defeated the US,” McCain stated. He is quoted many times for saying troops will stay in Iraq for 100 yrs if that’s how long it would take to get the job done. Personally, I favor immediate withdrawal from Iraq, and I support Hilary’s statement that continued US military involvement will not encourage the Iraqi government to make the hard decisions it needs to make to improve the nation. Furthermore, I feel that the US accomplished its mission to liberate the people of Iraq from the brutal Hussein Regime and help the nation reform afterwards. Now it’s time for the US to leave and let the Iraqi government take care of its people. In addition, there are too many problems in this nation that need immediate full attention, and continued warfare is not going to help. The US debt is estimated at around 9 trillion, and the US is constantly borrowing from the Chinese government and others to fund unneeded expenses, like the Iraq War. A nation in a continued deficit state is never good, and the debt is going to be inevitably be paid back. The US needs to pay back nations as soon as possible, and needs to reach a state of budget surplus to improve this nation in areas such as healthcare and unemployment.
Another immense issue in the upcoming election is healthcare. Around 50 million Americans are uninsured, which means that a visit to the emergency room could cost around $150,000. Even those insured are struggling to pay for ir and or are not receiving the proper healthcare they need. For instance, an insurance company may deny paying for an operation even if it means it could save someone’s life, if it finds an excuse like the operation being deemed experimental. Many Americans today live in fear that an accident could leave them bankrupt, which has happened countless times and continues to occur. The insurance companies only care about money, and they employ many professionals in order to maximize profits. Today’s presidential candidates have different ideas on how to improve healthcare in the US. Hilary Clinton believes universal healthcare is needed. Under this system, health insurance will be mandated, but will have many choices. For instance, one can pay for the cheapest insurance, or for premium service which would allow better treatment. All of the choices offered will be extremely affordable. For instance, premium service offers tax credits to limit health care premiums to a certain percentage of a family's income. Insurance companies must offer coverage to anyone who applies, and her plan will vastly expand Medicare, an unprofitable government insurance company . This will lead current insurance companies to lower their prices and expand their healthcare coverage in order to compete with government insurance companies. The plan, which is estimated to cost 110 billion will be paid for by taking away tax cuts to those who make 250,000 or more. On the other hand, McCain opposes universal healthcare. He believes that simply making it a bit more affordable will solve the problem. McCain will provide tax dividends to those who can’t afford health insurance and lower rates by encouraging businesses to negotiate with insurance companies for lower rates. He will also expand Medicare. Personally, I am in favor for Clinton’s plan, as universal healthcare will provide all Americans with cheap health insurance, which is what many American’s really need today. McCain’s plan will only perpetuate the problem. Health insurance will still be really expensive, and giving more money to those who can’t afford it barely solves the problem. Insurance companies will still continue to deny coverage for expensive expenses which would defeat the purpose of having heal insurance. Therefore, McCain’s plan is a total waste of taxpayer money.
One other mammoth issue in the coming elections is immigration, particularly illegal Mexican immigration. Some propose to simply force all illegal immigrants to leave the US, while others believe these people should be given a chance to obtain citizenship through fines and certain measures. Clinton believes that the approximate 14 million illegal immigrants who didn’t commit a crime should be able to apply for citizenship. However, these people would have to wait several years, pay a fee and pay taxes over time. She also proposes that instead of building a barrier on the US Mexican Border, the US should simply hire people to watch the border. McCain on the other hand believes improving the barrier is crucial, and he voted to authorize construction of a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexican border. Still, he agrees with Clinton that those who committed a crime should be deported, but those who haven’t should have a chance at citizenship. Personally, I believe in Clinton’s plan more, as building a large fence will not stop anything. Mexicans will still find ways to come into this country illegally, and thus, the wall will be a waste of resources. Clinton’s plan to hire people to watch the border seems more reasonable as it discourages illegal immigration while creating more jobs for Americans. While I do support Clinton’s plan, I feel it is more important to improve the Mexican Economy, so Mexicans will not be so compelled to enter this country illegally.
Summarize the scandal of 1888
Democrat President Cleveland was running for presidency again in 1888. His opponent was William Henry Harrison. Cleveland lowered Tarriffs which madd him unpopular amongst rich corporations. He was also a little unpopular with the Irish communities, as he passed a fisheries treaty with the British which was an unpopular move amongst the Irish. Still, he was a mayor and governor of NY in the past. Republican Osgoodby wrote a letter to British Ambassador West posing as a Californian Englishman. The letter asked who he should vote for. When West wrote back, he suggested he should vote for Cleveland, as he was the best man from a British point of view. The republicans later published and distributed the letter two weeks before the elections. They called Cleveland Pro British. Harrison won the election with 233 electoral votes to Cleveland’s 168. Because of the letter, Harrison obtained more Irish votes in NY and therefore obtained NY’s 36 electoral votes. Unethical but intelligent Republican actions led to Harrison’s victory . The race was extremely close with only 7 electoral votes separating the two if NY electoral votes are not counted for; Cleveland also won the popular vote by 100,000 votes.
explain why the author feels Hilliary Clinton might be "the next Grover Cleveland?" Evaluate his position using evidence from your candidate research.
The author feels Hilary Clinton might be “the next Gover Cleveland”, as both are very similar. The author claims that both are not very different from the republicans. Cleveland did republican like actions; he put down strikes and backed Wall Street in making the Gold Standard. Clinton proposes to slowly bring troops home which could take forever; republicans are in favor of having the war. More importantly though, the author feels Clinton when implementing universal healthcare will do so in a more republican way. For example, she might negotiate too much with insurance companies which could perpetuate insurance companies’ power, something republicans are going to do.
On other issues though, Clinton is fully democratic. She is for making abortion legal and against perpetuating tax cuts for the rich for example; republican candidates would disagree.
Question to AP peers:
If you had the opportunity to run as a vice president for any president (during any era), who would you choose and why?
Hypothetically speaking of course, I would choose Andrew Jackson, as he was the toughest president of all time. He fought in 13 duels which I just found out recently. I would fight him in a duel of course, and then if I win, I would become President of the US which would be sweet.
Justin Lefkowitz
AP US History
Part I & Part II
The upcoming 2008 Presidential Election will be one filled with history in the making. There is a woman, Sen. Hillary Clinton, and a black man, Sen. Barack Obama, running for the Democratic Party. There are several key issues that will be dealt with by the candidates of the `08 Election. One key issue is health care. A couple of other key issues include “The War Against Terror” and the taxation of the classes. These three factors will be huge deciders when it comes to selecting a president.
Two of the candidates trying to make a run for the 2008 Presidential Election are Mike Huckabee from the Republican Party and Hillary Clinton from the Democratic Party. Both of these candidates are currently ranked 2nd in their parties. Mike Huckabee is a Southern Baptist Minister. As a result of this, the majority of his beliefs will be conservative, maybe a little too conservative. Since he is an ordained minister, many of his ideas do revolve around the Bible. Mr. Huckabee is pro-life, and not pro-choice like Hillary Clinton is. As a result of his views of the Bible, he stands against stem-cell research and same-sex marriage. Hillary Clinton, like Mike Huckabee, does oppose same-sex marriage, but she is willing to let the State Governments decide whether it should be allowed or not. Unlike Huckabee, Clinton is for stem-cell research and she is pro-choice when it comes to abortions. Hillary is also into researching energy. Besides researching alternative energies, she also hopes to make the national standard of gas for cars 55 miles-per-gallon by 2030. Hillary also wants the troops out of Iraq.
In my opinion, I would not for these two candidates. They do not fully cover the economic beliefs that I think this country needs. Ron Paul, the 3rd place Republican Party Candidate, is the only candidate left in the race, who focuses on the United States’ Economy as a whole. Everyone is focusing on health care, Iraq, and taxation. Ron Paul focused on a few of these things, but he usually spoke of the economy and what the USA needs to become a rich and glorious county like it once was. Out of the two leading candidates in the race for American Presidency, John McCain is my pick to win. I feel like he can beat Obama or Hillary, regardless of what the polls say.
Part III
The scandal of the 1888 election was one that is actually being reflected in the upcoming election of 2008. During this election, Grover Cleveland was up for re-election. He was going up against Benjamin Harrison, grandson of former president William Henry Harrison. The scandal had to do with one letter. This one letter, which was entitled “The Murchison Letter,” destroyed any chances that Grover Cleveland had of winning New York State’s delegates. This letter, published by the Republicans, basically said that Grover would be a good president from the British point of view. Grover Cleveland lost this election, even though he won the popular vote.
According to “NYT's Krugman: Hillary -- the Next Grover Cleveland?” Hillary Clinton is just like Grover Cleveland. They both believe that they are the ones who will be doing the right thing for America; then again, this could be said about all of the candidates. The reason for why Krugman believes they are so alike is because of how much these two candidates were becoming so much alike the opposing party. Cleveland was seen basically seen as a Democrat with Republican views. Clinton is now starting to focus on views of the Republicans. Since she is drifting away from the beliefs of her party, she is almost assured a loss, as Barack Obama gets the win. This could be why Hillary is starting to take a large hit in the Primary Elections.
In response to Teresa’s question, I would have loved to have been a Vice President under the Presidency of Bill Clinton. It seems like he had quite the easy job when he was President. Nothing was really happening at the time and under his rule, there were no wars. The only thing that happened under Clinton’s rule of Presidency was the Monica Lewinsky scandal. During this time, Al Gore, the Vice President for Clinton, was having a fairly easy job. This would have been a great time to be the Vice President of America.
Ashley Aydin
AP US – Block B
_________________________________
Wholly, the current presidential election has proved thrilling and erratic. Countless issues have been discussed and questioned, while candidates have revised their opinions and presentations of information. Nonetheless, three essential topics have been the cause of much countering and debate between the most demanded representatives. Throughout the process, economic stimulus, gun possession, and education have remained highly significant. Regarding these matters, John McCain, the most prominent Republican candidate, and Barack Obama, the most sensible Democratic candidate, have been head to head during public deliberations.
The financial crisis in the United States has continually increased and worsened. Accordingly, many citizens have brought light to the situation, posing queries to the about the future of the economy. In response to the issue, McCain aims to lower the corporate tax rate by ten percent, promote a first-year deduction of equipment and technology investment, and establish a permanent research and development tax credit. Contrastingly, Obama plans to pump seventy five billion into the economy by tax cuts and direct spending targeted at working families, seniors, homeowners and the unemployed. Furthermore, he will endorse future fiscal security by compiling forty five billion in reserves that can be injected into the economy quickly if the economy continues to deteriorate. Seemingly, both candidates have targeted tax cuts for the common good.
Furthermore, gun possession and usage has remained another worry for politically involved Americans. McCain has sponsored legislation requiring background checks at gun shows. Also, he has voted against a ten year extension of the assault weapons ban, opposing legislation requiring trigger locks for handguns. Overall, he has opposed crime bills, containing the assault artillery bans. Differently, Obama supports extending the assault weapons ban. Beneficially, he has challenged the national law against carrying concealed weapons, with exceptions for personnel, and has promoted weapon limitations.
Additionally, young pupils have continued to advise the current delegates to maintain a stable focus on education. McCain was a past supported of the No Child Left Behind Act. He has promoted the need for more charter schools and has endorsed the need of well rounded teachers and scholars. Distinguishingly, Obama intends to reform the No Child Left Act, making science and math instruction a national priority. Likewise, he has prepared to reduce the high school dropout rate, while ensuring the quality of worldly, experienced teachers.
Wholly, Obama’s goals and ideals are most reasonable. Gun possession and education are extremely critical in the ever changing world. As the global community becomes more diverse and populated, competition is swiftly soaring. Thus, an understanding, open minded president is needed to prepare the United States for a time full of improvement and modernization.
Although Obama has remarkable plans for the education and security sectors of our government, his economic plan proves most trusting. With his
Middle Class American Tax Relief, Obama will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the payroll tax they reimburse. Furthermore, Obama trusts that trade with foreign nations will strengthen the American economy and create more American jobs. Thoroughly, Obama will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support good American jobs. He will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world, standing firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to vital benchmarks. Obama will also pressure the World Trade Organization to enforce trade agreements and stop countries from continuing unfair government subsidies to foreign exporters and nontariff barriers on U.S. exports. Obama has also aimed to strengthen the ability of workers to organize unions. He will fight for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, ensuring that his labor appointees support workers' rights and will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers. Most importantly, Obama will raise the minimum wage, indexing it to inflation. He will also promote the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families, pay for basic needs, protect homeownership, and crack down on mortgage fraud. Seeing that all of his plans are fit to assist American families, Obama has accomplished my certainty of his success. For, money and income is what fuels this country.
_________________________________
“Dirty Campaign Trick: The Phony Charles Murchison Letter Upended Grover Cleveland's 1888 Presidential Bid” by Matthew Bandyk explains the unpredictability and volatility with candidates during elections. “In 1888, the sitting president was Grover Cleveland, a Democrat who had risked the support of big business by backing a lower tariff and earned a reputation for doing what he thought was right despite the political consequences”. Bandyk enlightens readers about the desperateness of officials and how losing representatives fight to attain a win. “When the ambassador endorsed Cleveland, he unknowingly stepped into the Republicans' trap; the party trumpeted his letter around the country as evidence that Cleveland had been pro-British all along. After the ballots were cast two weeks later, Cleveland had beaten Harrison in the popular vote by 100,000, but he had only 168 electoral votes to Harrison's 233.” Cleveland took a risk, and thus reached a great triumph. Although his move negatively affected Harrison’s career, Cleveland’s action granted him victory.
The campaign relates to Hilary Clinton’s situation because she has pursued actions in order to benefit her chances of wining, abolishing Obama’s independent opportunity. Moreover, Clinton has targeted precise audiences and followers to succeed and win difficult political victories. Generally, Clinton has used her personal political ties and powers for her own gain – just or not.
_________________________________
*Michelle’s comment about the political process is quite accurate. Political matters have always been corrupted and deceitful. Conversely, a politician must please a mass of people, that being exceedingly difficult. With distorted views and altering beliefs, governmental figures aim to impress their advocates and supporters, while drawing attention to their policies and superiority. Hence, representatives are responsible for their triumph and reputation. Undoubtedly, they must make certain that nothing affects them curtly.
Sarah Berfond
Block B
The leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, Barack Obama, and the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, John McCain, has very different views on the main issues facing the United States. In the areas of health coverage, the Iraq War and the economy these two candidates offer completely different solutions. The greatest difference between the two men is their position on Iraq. Barack Obama has promised to remove all American troops from Iraq within 16 months and John McCain is committed to building up the troop strength to a level which will insure some stability in the region and stop Al Qaeda attacks. On the issue of health insurance the candidates both believe in universal coverage but disagree on the way to accomplish this. Obama wants every American to have the opportunity to have the same coverage as members of congress and guarantee coverage for every child. He also wants to create a national network of coverage and lower costs by advancing medical technologies. McCain also wants to develop technologies to improve health care, but he wants the private insurance companies to provide the solutions rather than the government. The candidates’ positions on the solution to America’s economic problems are very different. Barack Obama wants to stimulate the economy by providing middle class tax cuts and finance it by eliminating the tax benefits given to the rich during the Bush administration. McCain wants to lower the middle class taxes, but he also wants lower taxes on corporations and intends to make it difficult for congress to raise taxes in the future. I support Senator Barack Obama’s position because I believe that he is more interested in stopping the Iraq War and helping all Americans. I think Senator McCain is interested in helping big business and prolonging the war, which I am against.
The scandal of 1888 involved a tight election between President Grover Cleveland and Republican candidate Benjamin Harrison. The election was very close and the 36 New York delegates would probably decide the winner. Cleveland had a reputation for ignoring political consequences of his decisions. The Republicans tried to win New York by manipulating the Irish vote to think that the British supported Cleveland. The Irish people did not like the British and would vote against Cleveland if this were true. The Republicans wrote a fake letter to the British asking who they favored and when the British responded that they supported Cleveland the Republicans sent the letter all over New York. Cleveland lost New York and the election. The article comparing Hillary Clinton to Grover Cleveland bases its opinion on the fact that Senator Clinton seems to change her political views based upon the financial and political support she receives from third parties. For example she claims to want reform for health coverage but has accepted millions of dollars from the insurance companies. The article is concerned that this will change her position. Basically, the candidate research has shown that all candidates are very vague on their positions and this allows them to change at any time, just like Grover Cleveland.
Response to Ashley Aydin’s comment- I agree with your opinions concerning Senator Obama. He strongly focuses on the most important issues regarding America which is needed in a president. Also, he has effective and reasonable solutions to the problems currently facing the country. Obama understands the most important issues facing Americans today and can successfully find solutions.
Part 1.
--> The 2008 Presidential elections are definitely one of the most important elections in American History. The list of key issues is extensive and many of them, controversial. Barrack Obama and John McCain are the front runners of the Democratic and Republican parties, respectively. In front of them are placed the major issues of Education, The Environment, and Same Sex Marriage.
-->On the topic of Education, these two politicians stand in two opposite corners. The No Child Left Behind act, which states that students need to meet a certain test score range for schools to receive funding is an issue that Obama feels should be reformed, placing an emphasis on math and science whilst McCain feels that the schools themselves should be reformed, rewarding good teachers but putting sub-par ones into another field of work.
-->Environmental issues are a great concern in the world today, with CO2 emissions sky high and global warming as a threat to life and society as we know it. While Obama would establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard to reduce emissions and offer incentives to those who plant trees to remove CO2 from the environment, McCain proposes alternative energy sources, including nuclear energy.
--> Same Sex Marriage is an issue that has only come to light as of recent, due to some very nosy politicians. While both McCain and Obama oppose same sex marriage, they feel that legal benefits should be available for the partner of the "spouse" receiving these benefits as well. Both candidates feel that states should decide the issue and are in favour of civil unions.
--> Neither Obama's or McCain's politics are actually supported by me, I personally disagree with every politician running at this exact moment. None of their views are very appealing, and will eventually run the country into turmoil, again.
Part 2.
The scandal of 1888 was a dirty trick used by the opposing political party to stop Grover Cleveland from getting elected. Due to New York's Irish Population, a letter stating that Cleveland was pro-British offended the Irish of New York, therefore keeping them from voting Democrat, helping the republicans win. I don't see, however, why Paul Krugman feels Hillary Clinton might be the next Grover Cleveland, even with candidate research.
To Teresa: Probably Reagan. He needed to be warned not to screw over the folks in the Middle East, and if it wasn't for him, America would not be in the situation that we are in now. -.-
Part One:
Issue 1
Education – No Child Left Behind
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 which intends to give parents more choices and emphasizes on doing what works based on scientific research, brings differing opinions from current US candidates. On the democratic side, Gravel is against this act. He feels it has left too many children behind and needs to be reformed and adequately funded. On the other side, Republican McCain fully supports this act. He believes the No Child Left Behind Act may have some flaws, but it’s a major milestone in trying to improve education in the United States.
Issue 2
Iraq War – Withdrawal
Gravel (Democrat) is insistent upon an immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops, and he believes that the sooner U.S. troops are withdrawn, the sooner there will be an end to the civil war that currently consumes Iraq. McCain (Republican) has defended Bush’s invasion of Iraq, insisting that it was the only way to keep that country from acquiring weapons of mass destruction
Issue 3
Same Sex – Marriage
Gravel (D) supports same sex marriage and opposes laws that allow discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. On the opposing side, McCain (R) defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and says a federal marriage ban might be appropriate if courts overturned state marriage laws.
My views would probably be most similar to those of Gravel. I agree with all of his positions on the three issues I presented earlier. Although McCain also brings up good arguments, I fully support Gravel’s opinions. I completely agree that that all laws that allow discrimination based on sexual orientation should be banned. Also, I feel the war in Iraq has gone on for long enough. The No Child Left Behind Act, although it was made with good intentions, does have flaws and I agree with Gravel that it must be reformed.
Part 2
In 1888 President Grover Cleveland had a reputation of doing what he thought was right, with little regard for the political consequences. During this election, a letter known as the “Murchison” Letter caused a scandalous election. A California Republican named George Osgoodby wrote a letter to Sir Lionel Sackville-West, the US British ambassador, under the name “Murchison." He described himself as a former Englishman and asked how he should vote in the upcoming presidential election. Sir Lionel suggested that Cleveland was the best man from the British point of view. This letter was published before the election, and caused Cleveland to lose New York state votes. According to NYT's Krugman: Hillary -- the Next Grover Cleveland? by Jon Wiener, Paul Krugman feels Hillary Clinton could be the Grover Cleveland of the upcoming election in regards to the health care issue. According to the New York Times, the health care industry has already contributed $2.7 million to Hillary, which is more than any other candidate in either party. Krugman is “concerned that she might do too much compromising and negotiating with the insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital companies, as she did as First Lady in 1993.” Hillary and Cleveland are similar in the way that they do what they think is best without always considering all the consequences. The author hints at the possibility that Clinton may become more similar to Cleveland by bargaining too much with private businesses, instead of concentrating on a federal approach to the subject, as Elizabeth stated.
Response to Teresa’s question:
If I were Vice President during any era I would pick either George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. If I were vice president for Washington it would be interesting since he was the first president. In one respect George Washington and I would be seen as the role models of how a president and vice president should act to certain situations. In addition, I would love to be a part of abolishing slavery during Abraham Lincoln’s time period.
Theresa- E- (plus an E for extra credit): I love the vice presidencey question and may use that as a basis for an upcoming presidential project. Be careful about generalizations; you indicate candidates are "full of hooey" but don't support that in your post. I would have been excited to serve as Linden Johnson's VP, mainly because I really respect his Great Society program, but we'll get to that.
Elizabeth - E: It saddens me that you have no interest in politics. I'd trust you in any office. Your post shows that you clearly understand turn of the century issues as well as modern "hot button" topics in US politics.
Kasey - I appreciate your branching out to examine third party politics and see your critiques. Sometimes (as in the Populist period) third parties exist for the purpose of pressuring front runners to take more aggressive stances on "fringe" issues; do you think this is the case for today's Greens and Libertarians? Nice work!
John Harden
Block B
(Sorry this is late, I completly forgot about it while on the trip and I have been busy otherwise.)
1. This years presidential primarys have certianly been quite interesting. On the right wing we have the Republicans being led in popular vote at this time by John McCain with Mike Huckabee not far behind. On the left wing we have the Democrats who are being led in popular vote at this time by Barack Obama with Hillary Clinton not far behind. There are three major issues in this upcoming presidental election which are being debated over constantly by canidates during the primaries.
One of the issues currently being debated is that of same-sex marriage. Marriage is currently defined as being the unity between only that of a man and woman. However, many people oppose this current definition as many same-sex couples are together but can not celebrate their found love with a wedding, but more importantly, they can not share the same benfits that married striaght couples can share. Barack Obama of the Democratic party opposes same-sex marriage but not same-sex civil unions. He believes the definition of marriage should stay as is. John McCain of the Republican party believes the current definition of marriage should be conserved aswell. He, also like Obama, suppourts same-sex couples sharing their benfits. In this case, being gay myself, I suppourt Barack Obama more as he has clearly stated his suppourt of same-sex civil unions.
Another issue under debate is that of Abortion. Many religious organizations have called for a banishment of abortion on a federal level for they believe that abortion is murder. Mike Huckabee of the Republican party is a strong religious conservative and therefore also suppourts a banishment of Abortion. He believes all outcomes of Roe vs. Wade, (a supreme court case which legalized abortion) should be overturned. Hilary Clinton of the Democratic party wants to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would turn Roe vs. Wade into federal law, therefore suppourting choice. I suppourt Hilary Clinton more on this issue as I am pro-choice.
Lastly, another debate looked at a bit less then the other two is the debate over stem cell research. Embryotic stem cell reasearch requires a un-born fetus to be practiced but in the long run such research can do much good for society. Cures for paralysis have already been found through stem cell research. Barack Obama of the Democratic party suppourts funding of all stem cell research. John McCain of the Republican party suppourts funding for research which will only be performed on embryos which would otherwise be wasted or frozen. I agree more with John McCain on this issue because if the embryo is to go to waste otherwise, it should be put to use.
2. The scandal of 1888 happened during the presidental elections of that time and led to Grover Clevelands sudden victory. Many believe that not only our Clinton and Clevelands policies similar, but their methodical planning are similar aswell. Some believe that Clinton’s emotional outbursts are her way of connecting to the people like Cleveland did in 1888. Cleveland lost the much of the electoral vote but clearly defeated his opposition in popular vote. Clinton might do the same to her Republican adverseary in November of 2008.
In response to Teresa's question, I would be vice-president under Teddy or Franklin Roosevelt. Either one because I would like to have been in power in the executive branch during either WW1 or the Spanish-American War.
Dominique D. Johnson
AP U.S. history
The 2008 presidential race has been one of the most remarkable big bang of the century, since there is a woman running for president as well as a black man running for president. Neither, Hillary or Obama has given up as they as well as the Republican side are going through the Primary Election of getting as many states as possible. With Obama in the running of the Democratic side and Hillary not far behind, many are eager to see who will be the candidate chosen to run during the General Election. It is important that candidates must have money as well as the support of the media with the role of celebrities such as Oprah for Obama.Thus far, each candidate publicly announced what their three main issues as a president should be addressed, including the war in Iraq and health care system.
Hillary Clinton on the Democratic side has shown the world that she is all for international health care system for all people of all classes. She is highlighting that issue as being one of the three key issues during her run for presidency. Hillary discusses the economic challenges this nation is facing since it once was dominating and popular and is now sinking down to the bottom. The currency of the U.S. dollar is an example of just how serious this issue is. Hillary also addresses the issue of retirement security in the U.S. since this issue has been avoided and ignored. The private savings has fallen down tremendously since the Great Depression. About one-half of American families have retirement savings accounts in any given year. Those who do contribute to their savings account are saving too little or nothing for their futures. Medicare and Social Security will not help secure the future of these families.In her argument, she targets the middle class as being the most struggling and oppressed class that has been ignored. But, health care for all will only increase taxes, which is another issue that the government is facing. Obama states that one of his key arguments that he targeting is tax fairness. This coincides with Hillary's eagerness to have a substantial health care system that everyone will benefit everyone but would ultimately increase taxes tremendously.
John McCain on the Republican side, like Hillary, addresses the health care system. However, he has a different approach to the crisis than Hillary. He is thinking ahead in the future for Medicare being a popular health insurance for many Americans being broke by 2019. he addresses this issue as being one of the “perfect storms” that perhaps will be the fall down of the American people if not addressed by the next president. McCain also addresses private property rights regulations is effecting property ownership. McCain suggests that American homeowner is allowing the government to seize her home for economic development and gain under the guise of "valid public use." His argument is that the protection of property rights lies at the heart of our constitutional system. Out of all the candidates addressing the health care crisis, I support Obama’s proposal that was first proposed by John Edwards to have a universal health care system run though private insurance companies. This will not increase taxes but would be reversing the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
Between McCain and Clinton, I support Hillary Clinton’s politics more in the cases of the health care system and economic challenges, since this is one of the many issues that America has faced and is facing write now. There has not been a solution for either crisis and with her enthusiastic ideas and moral determination, Clinton could possibly be president. However, Clinton is also hypercritical when she made her chose publicly to go to war in Iraq. Now that many see this war point less, and is destroying a country and instilling fear in another, and just more hatred and rebels plotting, she retracts her words and goes along with the public cry to bring the troops home.
Glover Cleveland, the twenty second and twenty-fourth president, was the only President to serve two non-consecutive terms of the years 1885–1889 and 1893–1897. Admired by citizens for his honesty, independence and loyalty to the principles of classical liberalism, Cleveland used the dirtiest trick in the book to become president despite their personal feelings of the Irish settlers who were offended by his letter which stated that he was pro-British. He was elected to the Presidency in the era of Republican political domination that lasted from 1860 to 1912. Matthew Bandyk of “Dirty Campaign Trick: The Phony Charles Murchison Letter Upended Grover Cleveland's 1888 Presidential Bid” believes that Hillary Clinton will perhaps be like the former president because the public figure has used the universal health care argument ever since she was the First Lady in the early 1990s.
Response to Teresa:
If I were running for vice president, I would want to be under the Obama regime because I stand by and support his arguments and position on key issues. He is determined to make this country a better and safer government and live up to its name as a democracy.
John: E
Dominique: E
*Extra Credit.
First Marking Period: Second Semester.
Ashley Aydin – AP U.S.
Richard Nixon V. John Kennedy: Debates.
(1960)
For the first time, the nominees of the two major parties met to debate during a general election. Congress suspended the equal time provision of the Federal Communications Act of 1934, and both Vice President Richard Nixon and Sen. John Kennedy believed they had something to gain by debating. There were a total of four debates, the major theme being global communism. During the first debate, Kennedy won the image battle over Nixon who, recovering from the flu, appeared pale and insipid. Kennedy was aggressive, taking the offensive to confront what was widely perceived to be his greatest weakness - his lack of experience. Furthermore, Kennedy stated that he didn’t believe in big government, but affective government action. Contrastingly, Nixon blamed the country's economic problems on Democratic President Truman's administration and argued that things were much improved under the outgoing Republican administration of Eisenhower.
During the second debate, Nixon learned from the mistakes he made in Chicago and adopted a more appropriate image. Nixon also took a more aggressive stance, abandoning the proper style he tried to hold during the first discussion. During the second debate, the most heated exchange was about Quemoy and Matsu, two Taiwan-controlled islands just miles off the Chinese mainland. Kennedy said that the line of defense in the Far East should have been drawn at Taiwan. However, Nixon argued that the two islands should have been where the West drew the line against Communism. The two islands, Cuba, and the Cold War were the main focuses of the next two debates. After the second debate, Nixon campaigned on the theme that Kennedy would let Communists take the islands of Quemoy and Matsu. Most the third debate focused on these islands.
The news out of the fourth debate was Cuba and Kennedy's statement that the U.S. government should support democratic anti-Castro forces. Chiefly, Nixon thought Kennedy's plan was hazardously irresponsible, supporting the idea discretely in private. The issue greatly publicized Kennedy’s points on Cuba, outshining Nixon’s thoughts. The remainder of the debate was a reiteration of previous themes.
Bush V. Gore: Florida Recount.
(2000)
Generally, the contest to become the 43rd President of the United States became a Supreme Court dispute over the way we vote. According to sources, Al Gore won the popular vote with 50,456,169 ballots and George W. Bush only received 50,996,116. Al Gore won many states by a landslide. Differently, George W. Bush barely won but was given all of the electoral votes.
Another possible reason why the election was so close is because of the popularity of third party candidate Ralph Nader. Like other third party candidates in history, Nader offered an alternative to the Republican and Democratic Parties. The election was so close that every electoral vote counted. Al Gore received 266 electoral votes and George W. Bush won the race with 271 votes. However, there was a problem with the ballets in several counties in Florida. Something was amiss as the media prematurely announced that Al Gore had won Florida - later coming back to explain that George W. Bush had acquired Florida’s electoral votes.
Primarily, Florida’s Supreme Court decided on November 21, 2000 that the votes cast should be recounted. The Florida Supreme Court was in the process of recounting votes and would have met their deadline if Justice Scalia and four of his fellow justices of the United States Supreme Court hadn’t stepped in saying some of the counts may not be legal. Seemingly, these five judges, along with Bush’s lawyers helped slow down the recount causing Florida to miss the December 12th cut-off date for congress to dispute the results of the election. It is widely argues that the five justices who voted in favor to stop the Florida recount were predisposed to do so. Thus, it is possible that some of the justices favored George W. Bush.
Extra Credit.
First Marking Period – Second Semester.
Ashley Aydin – AP U.S.
The Green Party was created in 1984to serve as a grassroots movement aimed at educating people on community issues, important legislation, and social injustices. The group’s purposes have remained the same, but its scope and size have widened substantially.
Within the Green Party sits the Green Congress, a national board of delegates from various state organizations. The Greens currently have organizations in forty six of the states - where they have elected more than fifty Green officials to local and county governments.
The Green Party describes their platform as a progressive movement that supports environmentally friendly policies, campaign finance reform, the decentralization of government, and personal responsibility to communities. The party also works on the local level to stop homelessness, champion equal rights, and fight for nonviolent solutions to many of today's problems.
Compared to McCain and Obama, the Green Party spotlights the complete use of environmental resources, making certain that the environment is being treated securely. The Green Party also has precise goals targeted at teaching the common people about their national impacts, eliminating the possibility of negative, massive countrywide crises.
-------------------------------
Contrastingly, the Libertarian Party, created in 1971, promotes pro-freedom choice in American politics. The party exists to create a renewed vigor to long-cherished American ideals of liberty and personal responsibility.
Generally, libertarians believe that practicing freedom is vital. Additionally, libertarians follow that being independent is what encourages all people to choose what they want from life – how they live, love, work, and pursue their ambitions. The Libertarian way, therefore, is a logically consistent approach to politics based on the moral principle of self-ownership. Each individual has the right to control his or her own body, action, speech, and property. The government's only role is to help individuals defend themselves from force and fraud.
Complementary to McCain and Obama, the Libertarian Party puts full emphasis on the American individual and how he/she can better their practices of authorization and thought. Although the United States promotes freewill and prosperity, the Libertarian Party consistently pushes for the granting of total public autonomy.
Post a Comment